Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Council Agenda 20100809 rev 01

[Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2343 bytes --]

On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 11:18:03AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 03:05:34 -0700
> Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > GLEP 55 *was* put up for a vote, along with GLEP 54, on 20090514.
> > > GLEP 54 was accepted subject to GLEP 55 being approved. The vote on
> > > GLEP 55 was a tie.
> > 
> > A tie, with a decision to revisit next meeting- the next meeting it 
> > was decided that yes, g55 is addressing what can be considered a real 
> > issue.  And in the 14 months since then, no one has requested it be 
> > voted on, or revisited.
> 
> It's extremely misleading of you to claim that it's the responsibility
> of the GLEP 55 authors to push it to the Council at this point. That
> was already tried several times, and got nowhere.

Whether you like it or not, it *is* the authors responsibility.
If you want something passed/accepted it's ultimately your 
responsibility to see it through to the finish- even if the last 
council dropped it on the ground.

Hopefully to make this clear so that this claim never shows up again, 
shit happens.  The "request for topics" and "agenda" emails that are 
sent out are your chance to request council discussion, to point out 
that they dropped something, etc.  Things don't always make it onto 
the council agenda- you keep pushing, refining the proposal, etc, till 
you get it in there.  Like it or not, that's the system.

If in doubt, I'll just point out that both mtime and REQUIRED_USE were 
dropped multiple months- pushing them forward I deemed worthwhile so I 
kept bringing it up till it made it into an agenda instead of 
silently dropped.

Either way, those are your options- if you want something implemented, 
ultimately it's your responsibility to see it through.

I'd strongly argue this applies beyond just the council- for PMS as an 
example, even if you manage to get something approved ultimately if 
you want it to move forward the implementation falls to your plate.  
Same thing goes for cvs/git, either you're reliant on other peoples 
time, or you contribute your own time to try and move it forward.

For the Heinlein fans, TANSTAFL is appropriate.

Either way, it's on the agenda.  In the future ask for stuff to be 
readded if it falls off, saves a lot of grief in the process.

~harring

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]